I tried using that checkstye directly and didn't work right away. it probably needs update versions or something else.
+1 to just use the google checks... just needs to be worked out. although I would add: <!-- Checks for imports --> <module name="AvoidStarImport"/> <module name="RedundantImport"/> <module name="UnusedImports"/> And the sevntu checkstyle I contributed to sevntu: <!-- Sevntu checks, http://sevntu-checkstyle.github.io/sevntu.checkstyle/ --> <module name="DiamondOperatorForVariableDefinition"/> <module name="RequiredParameterForAnnotation"> <property name="annotationName" value="Parameterized.Parameters"/> <property name="requiredParameters" value="name"/> </module> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Timothy Bish <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/29/2016 03:01 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: >> >> I don't know about other, but to me this is trivial change to me and I >> don't mind anyways. All I really mind is to have a checkstyle in >> place, whatever that is :) >> >> What would need to be changed on the checkstyle rules? did you check? > > > From the old thread we lazily decided that we should adopt the Google style > guide which is quite close to the 5.x code as it stands now. I didn't look > close enough on the original commit to notice that this was not exactly what > was done but having been in the code over the past few days it has become > apparent it didn't go as far as I thought it was going to. It is a bit > irritating trying to bring over code from 5.x as the formatting never quite > matches and breaks the checkstyle rules. > > The Google style formatting rules are here: > https://github.com/google/styleguide all in nice little files that can be > imported into the IDE of your choice. > > For checkstyle configuration to use the Google style that is covered in the > CheckStyle project here: > https://github.com/checkstyle/checkstyle/blob/master/src/main/resources/google_checks.xml > > Previous thread on this is here for reference: > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/activemq-dev/201508.mbox/browser > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Christopher Shannon >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hey Everyone, >>> >>> Last year we had a discussion on the coding style for Artemis and a >>> change >>> was made to the opening curly brace. However, I've been in the code >>> quite >>> a bit the past couple weeks doing testing (I am starting to look at what >>> needs to be done to help move missing features from 5.x) and I've noticed >>> a >>> couple of things that still don't match up with the 5.x style. >>> >>> In general I think think we should try and get the style closer to 5.x >>> because it will make going back and forth between to two code bases >>> easier. >>> The main thing I noticed is the while the opening brace was moved the >>> closing curly brace is still on its own line which doesn't match the >>> style >>> of 5.x. This makes it a bit annoying when working in one project and then >>> doing work in a different project as suddenly you have to remember where >>> the curly brace is supposed to go. >>> >>> For example: >>> >>> Current format: >>> try { >>> //do something >>> } >>> catch (Exception cause) { >>> >>> } >>> >>> Proposed format, notice that the catch(Exception) part is on the same >>> line >>> as the closing brace >>> try { >>> //do something >>> } catch (Exception cause) { >>> >>> } >>> >>> Thoughts? My preference would be to adopt entire google style guide but I >>> think at the least should fix the closing curly brace so it matches up >>> with >>> 5.x. >> >> >> > > > -- > Tim Bish > twitter: @tabish121 > blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ > -- Clebert Suconic
